Let us continue to peruse the writing in Romaiym (Romans) 7.  From verse 2 through verse 6, given the context of the discussion, we have elected to replace the word law, typically used in place of the Greek nomos, with the word mitzvah, meaning a singular command. 

Romaiym (Romans) 7:2-3

For the woman which has a man is bound by that mitsvah to her man so long as he lives; but if the man be dead, she is loosed from that mitsvah of her man. 3 So then if, while her man lives, she be married to another man, she shall be a woman that breaks wedlock: but if her man be dead, she is free from that mitsvah; so that she is no breaker of wedlock, though she be married to another man.

Here, Sha’ul is giving us a particular mitzvah from the Torah, not from the Mishnah, or an oral law that is otherwise unknown to the world of those unschooled in the practices of the Pharisees (Parashiym). How is this relevant if the Torah was not applicable?  Here is the passage itself:

Bere’shiyth (Genesis) 2:24

Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.

This mitzvah has a completion in the words of HaMashiach.

Mattithyahu (Matthew) 19:3-9

The Parashiym also came unto him, tempting him, and saying unto him, Is it Lawful for a man to put away his woman for every cause? 4 And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female, 5 And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his woman: and they twain shall be one flesh? 6 Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What את eth therefore YAH has joined together, let not man put asunder. 7 They say unto him, Why did Mosheh then command to give a writing of divorcement, and to put her away? 8 He said unto them, Mosheh because of the hardness of your hearts suffered you to put away your women: but from the beginning it was not so. 9 And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his woman, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, breaks wedlock: and whoso marries her which is put away breaks wedlock.

It is from this context that Sha’ul launches into the most delicate of discussions concerning the metaphor of the groom and the bride:

Romaiym (Romans) 7:4-5

Wherefore, my brethren, ye also put to death that mitsvah by the body of HAMASHIACH; that ye should be married to another, even to him who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto YAH.

First, we understand that the house of Yisra’el (all of the twelve tribes) was a bride to YAH, and YAH was a husband unto the house of Yisra’el.  In the Hebrew, the word for husband is the same as the word for master and lord, which is ba’al.

The word ba`al (Strong’s 1167) means a master; hence, a husband, or lord.

Now in the Cepher Husha we have a statement concerning this very issue, and a prophecy concerning the coming of the son of man.

Husha (Hosea) 2:16

And it shall be at that day, says YAHUAH, that you shall call me Ishi; and shall call me no more Ba’ali.

Interesting, isn’t it?  It is YAHUAH who speaks saying that he was called Ba’ali (properly translated as my Lord).  Then he predicts the coming day that we will call him Ishi, which is properly translated as my man.  This, therefore, is a prophecy concerning the coming of the Son of Man, the manifestation of YAH in the flesh.  But this is also a prophecy concerning the coming divorce of both the house of Yisra’el and the house of Yahudah as set forth in Yermiyahu (Jeremiah) 3).

Yet Sha’ul argues here that we are free from the mitzvah of wedlock by not only the death and the body of MASHIACH, but our death in him.  This passage then declares that the mitzvah concerning wedlock and the freedom to remarry following the death of the husband is no longer applicable, because both the husband and the wife have passed. 

Romaiym (Romans) 7:5-6

For when we were in the flesh, the motions of sins, which were by that mitsvah, did work in our members to bring forth fruit unto death. 6 But now we are delivered from that mitsvah, that being dead wherein we were held; that we should serve in newness of the ruach, and not in the oldness of the letter.

Sha’ul then elaborates that wedlock and the birthing of progeny nonetheless continues a cycle of death – from birth to death – but delivery from that cycle happens through being reborn in the ruach (spirit) – born again – following the death of the old man of sin vicariously in the death of MASHIACH. 

So, in this passage, is Sha’ul talking about the Torah being dead?  No, he is speaking in particular about the specific mitzvah which governs the ability to remarry following the death of the husband, and that only.  He even goes on to clear this up in the very next verse:

Romaiym (Romans) 7:7-25

What shall we say then? Is the Torah sin? Never. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the Torah: for I had not known lust, except the Torah had said, You shall not covet. 8 But sin, taking occasion by the commandment, wrought in me all manner of concupiscence. For without the Torah sin was dead. 9 For I was alive without the Torah once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died. 10 And the commandment, which was ordained to life, I found to be unto death. 11 For sin, taking occasion by the commandment, deceived me, and by it slew me. 12 Wherefore the Torah is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good. 13 Was then that which is good made death unto me? Never. But sin, that it might appear sin, working death in me by that which is good; that sin by the commandment might become exceeding sinful. 14 For we know that the Torah is of the RUACH: but I am carnal, trafficked by sin. 15 For that which I do I allow not: for what I would, that do I not; את eth but what I hate, that do I. 16 If then את eth I do that which I would not, I consent unto the Torah that it is good. 17 Now then it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwells in me. 18 For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwells no good thing: for to will is present with me; but how to perform that which is good I find not. 19 For the good that I would I do not: but the evil which I would not, that I do. 20 Now if I do that I would not, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwells in me. 21 I find then a mitsvah, that, when I would do good, evil is present with me. 22 For I delight in the Torah of YAHUAH after the inward man: 23 But I see another instruction in my members, warring against the instruction of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the instruction of sin which is in my members. 24 O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death? 25 I thank YAHUAH through YAHUSHA HAMASHIACH our ADONAI. So then with the mind I myself serve the Torah of YAHUAH; but with the flesh the instruction of sin.